<![CDATA[The Biggest Losers: JVC, Sharp, Hitachi and Pioneer Battle for the Super-Slimmest TV - Gizmodo Comments]]> <![CDATA[The Biggest Losers: JVC, Sharp, Hitachi and Pioneer Battle for the Super-Slimmest TV - Gizmodo Comments]]> <![CDATA[The Biggest Losers: JVC, Sharp, Hitachi and Pioneer Battle for the Super-Slimmest TV]]> Hows it going? I was woundering did anyone at the ces show check out the soyo stand? Did they have the new Honeywell tvs on display and if they did how did they look? Thanks

joppman82

]]> <![CDATA[The Biggest Losers: JVC, Sharp, Hitachi and Pioneer Battle for the Super-Slimmest TV]]> @drsmith: Absolutely true. My father-in-law bought a dvd player that's all of 1/2" high, but it's still close to a foot deep.

Now, what someone needs to invent is a good vertical-format dvd player - perhaps a slot loader with the remote-control sensor on the side facing you. That would optimize space and allow for more versatile positioning.

And I'm all about versatile positioning.

Architecturally. What? What were you thinking?

ps61318

]]> <![CDATA[The Biggest Losers: JVC, Sharp, Hitachi and Pioneer Battle for the Super-Slimmest TV]]> the thin thing cracks me up, personally I want the best picture, size isn't that important, I don't move very often, and I never move my TV once it's in its place in the living room. Hell the bigger it is the less likely someone is to try to steal it. Everyone I've ever met with a flat panel lcd or plasma has had it sitting on a damn entertainment center that is at least 12" deep, so what the fuck is the point?

djdare

]]> <![CDATA[The Biggest Losers: JVC, Sharp, Hitachi and Pioneer Battle for the Super-Slimmest TV]]> Well, theres also a benefit in making the unit lighter and smaller from the manufacturing cost POV. They can ship 12 TV's now for less weight than 10 for example, so total shipping costs per TV can be maybe 10% less.

poobear

]]> <![CDATA[The Biggest Losers: JVC, Sharp, Hitachi and Pioneer Battle for the Super-Slimmest TV]]> For all the parents in here, i feel for you, i grew up in a house with lots of kids, so i know what your talking about.

But that is just the name of the game. New tech is always delicate. Then, when the manufacturers reach a plateu on tech development, they turn to making the product more robust.

A poor example would be CD burners. The topped out at like (guess) 52x. Any faster and cheap CD's tend to explode.

So they put more effort to making everything else about the cd burner better. :)

I remember back in the 90's when CD's took 45 minutes to burn, and more than half were costers. :D I likely didn't know what i was doing. :P

rainfever

]]> <![CDATA[The Biggest Losers: JVC, Sharp, Hitachi and Pioneer Battle for the Super-Slimmest TV]]> I don't get the thinness thing either. Really - is one inch going to make that much of a difference?? I don't think so. Even if the display is 1/4 of an inch thick, my DVD player is still going to be at least 6 inches deep regardless.

drsmith

]]> <![CDATA[The Biggest Losers: JVC, Sharp, Hitachi and Pioneer Battle for the Super-Slimmest TV]]> @ideaman2020: You don't even need to hang it on a wall. But the entertainment center necessary becomes smaller and smaller. The TV used to be the biggest item on this kind of furniture, but that is changing now. Pretty soon, a single device such a HTPC will take care of all the other functions you just mentioned.

Hvedhrungr

]]> <![CDATA[The Biggest Losers: JVC, Sharp, Hitachi and Pioneer Battle for the Super-Slimmest TV]]> @Hvedhrungr: Well... yeah, you could hang the display on the wall.

But you've still got your cable box, dvd player, etc. sitting there taking up spaces...

ideaman2020

]]> <![CDATA[The Biggest Losers: JVC, Sharp, Hitachi and Pioneer Battle for the Super-Slimmest TV]]> @DeadWriter: Well, at least where I'm at, living space is at a premium. The thinner the display, the closer you can put it to the wall, and the more space you retain.

On the other hand, these things had better be encased in *something*. If they get any thinner, they'll break from just looking at them the wrong way.

Hvedhrungr

]]> <![CDATA[The Biggest Losers: JVC, Sharp, Hitachi and Pioneer Battle for the Super-Slimmest TV]]> Why is thickness important?

DeadWriter

]]> <![CDATA[The Biggest Losers: JVC, Sharp, Hitachi and Pioneer Battle for the Super-Slimmest TV]]> @WidescreenJohn: yea ur right. I got a little sister who loves wii but the damn remote nails the tv non-stop. Thank god for those silicon covers now the thing bounces like a superball when it hits ( you gotta duck but the TV is fine)

I bet all of these hin models will be in glass so no one puts a foot through them

mferrari

]]> <![CDATA[The Biggest Losers: JVC, Sharp, Hitachi and Pioneer Battle for the Super-Slimmest TV]]> @Tutelary:

You're obviously not a parent.

WidescreenJohn

]]> <![CDATA[The Biggest Losers: JVC, Sharp, Hitachi and Pioneer Battle for the Super-Slimmest TV]]> @FuzzyPlushroom: Why exactly would you be abusing your tv?

tutelary

]]> <![CDATA[The Biggest Losers: JVC, Sharp, Hitachi and Pioneer Battle for the Super-Slimmest TV]]> I'm starting to get tired of these anorexic screens. You poke them, they break. I like a TV (or monitor, for that matter) with some junk in the trunk. One that can take a bit of abuse.

FuzzyPlushroom

]]>